How does the current valuation of WHG (price‑to‑earnings, price‑to‑book, etc.) compare to its peers after these announcements?

Bottom line:

The press release you quoted does not contain any of the numbers you need to calculate (or to compare) Westwood Holdings Group, Inc. (WHG) valuation multiples such as price‑to‑earnings (P/E), price‑to‑book (P/B), EV/EBITDA, etc. Therefore, a precise “after‑announcement” comparison to peers cannot be derived from the information that was provided.

Below is a step‑by‑step guide you can follow to obtain the required data, compute WHG’s current valuation ratios, and benchmark them against a relevant peer set.

1. What you need to gather

Typical peer group for WHG (asset‑management and investment‑company stocks) might include:

• Invesco Ltd. (IVZ)
• Franklin Resources, Inc. (BEN)
• Legg Mason (LM) – now part of Franklin, but still useful for historic comps
• AllianceBernstein Holding L.P. (AB)
• Guggenheim Partners‑related listed vehicles (if any)
• Other smaller publicly traded asset‑management firms that fall within the Russell 2000 (e.g., **O’Reilly Automotive is not a peer, but you would filter by SIC code 6722 – “Investment Offices”).
  

2. How to calculate WHG’s valuation multiples

Note: Because WHG is an asset‑management firm, P/B is often a preferred metric (book value reflects net assets under management after liabilities) and Price‑to‑Net‑Asset‑Value (P/NAV) may also be considered.

3. Benchmarking against peers

1. Collect the same multiples for each peer (use the same “trailing twelve‑month” window to ensure comparability).
   
2. Calculate the median/average of each multiple across the peer set.
   
3. Compare WHG’s values:
   

• If WHG’s P/E < peer median, the market may be pricing WHG cheaper on earnings (potential undervaluation, or reflects lower growth expectations).
  
• If WHG’s P/B < peer median, the stock could be a bargain relative to its net asset base. Conversely, a higher P/B might indicate a premium for superior management, higher fee rates, or stronger growth prospects.
  
• EV/EBITDA works similarly; lower than peers suggests cheaper enterprise valuation relative to operating cash generation.

1. Contextual factors that can justify deviations:
   
   • Recent AUM growth (WHG’s AUM rose to $18.3 B from $16.8 B) → potentially higher future fee revenue, which can justify a higher multiple.
     
   • Inclusion in the Russell 2000 → may increase demand from index‑tracking funds, providing a valuation boost.
     
   • New ETF launches (MDST, sector‑volatility ETFs) → can generate additional fee income and diversify revenue streams, again supporting a premium.
     
   • Liquidity and share‑float considerations (small‑cap stocks often trade at a discount due to limited analyst coverage).
     

4. Quick “ball‑park” illustration (using publicly available numbers as of ≈ 20 Aug 2025)

Below is a hypothetical snapshot that you can replace with the actual numbers you pull from your data source. It demonstrates how the comparison would look.

Interpretation (based on the illustrative numbers):

- WHG’s P/E (9.4×) is modestly below the peer median (10.5×), indicating the market is pricing its earnings a bit cheaper than the sector average.

- Its P/B (1.64×) is also below the peer median (1.85×), suggesting a modest discount relative to its net asset base.

- The EV/EBITDA (13.6×) is slightly higher than peers, which could reflect expectations of stronger fee‑growth from the new ETF launches and AUM expansion.

If the actual numbers you retrieve show a similar pattern, you could conclude that WHG is currently trading at a slight valuation discount relative to its peers—potentially an attractive entry point, especially given the recent AUM growth and index inclusion. Conversely, if WHG’s multiples are higher than peers, the market may be rewarding the company for its recent strategic initiatives.

5. How to get the data quickly

• Bloomberg Terminal (or Bloomberg app):
  EQS <Equity> PE <GO> → shows P/E, P/B, EV/EBITDA for WHG and a peer group.
  
• FactSet: Use the “Peer Group” function, set the industry filter to “Asset Management – Diversified”.
  
• Yahoo! Finance:
  
  • Quote page → “Statistics” → P/E, P/B, Enterprise Value, EBITDA.
    
  • “Competitors” tab for peer multiples.
    
• SEC filings: The latest Form 10‑K (filed early 2025) will have the balance sheet (for BVPS) and income statement (for EPS, EBITDA).
  

6. Summary for a decision‑maker

1. Collect current market data for WHG (price, EPS, book value, EV, EBITDA).
   
2. Calculate WHG’s core multiples (P/E, P/B, EV/EBITDA).
   
3. Compile the same multiples for a peer set of similarly sized asset‑management companies.
   
4. Compare:
   • Below‑peer multiples → possible undervaluation, especially compelling given the positive catalysts (AUM growth, Russell 2000 inclusion, new ETF suite).
     
   • Above‑peer multiples → market may be pricing in higher growth expectations; consider whether the fee‑generation from new ETFs and AUM expansion justifies the premium.
     
5. Factor in qualitative drivers (index inclusion, ETF launches, partnership with WEBs) that could sustain or improve multiples over the coming quarters.
   

Once you have the actual numbers, you can plug them into the framework above to produce a precise, data‑driven valuation comparison. If you need assistance pulling the data from a specific platform (Bloomberg, FactSet, etc.) or interpreting the results, feel free to let me know!